Globalisation Paradox

Updated on September 8, 2011

Globalization being as broad a subject as it is, it can be described as fire in that it is neither good nor bad. If used correctly it can heat our homes, cook our food etc, if used carelessly it can burn down entire cities, destroy lives.

Globalisation comes to be a paradox when it is being used as a tool to stop or prevent poverty, with the apparent visage of promising riches to all but sadly only giving the riches to a few. In the terms of production, globalisation utilises the most harshest and inhumane treatment of resources i.e. the deforestation and desertification of the parts of South America and North America (rainforest {Brazil} & Nevada) which doesn’t benefit the people who live there. Take the indigenous population of the rainforest who are dying off due to the increased consumption of the Western world that fuels the cold-calculating machine that is globalisation. And of course yes, globalisation has helped companies grow, maximize profit etc and helped country’s economies; but where there is light and is darkness. Behind the hugs and smiles, this tool can be used to devastating ends. Looking at multi-national corporations for example, they in effect control governments so instead of having, in Lincoln’s words, ‘a government for the people, by the people’, you’ll have a government for the corporations, by the corporations thus hindering the democratic system and process most western countries pride themselves with.

Furthermore the growing disparities between the global north and global south is a result of globalisation caused through the exploitation of the other. Whilst the other promises riches to the exploited by making them believe their way of life is the only way i.e. money equals happiness. With this, we have generations of people migrating from their homes to foreign countries in search of the right way of life, and of course it is providing employees to the firms of the foreign county but sadly it is also taking away the highly skilled workers from another country thus crippling the country’s own economy.

Looking at China we can already see the effects of globalisation. It being a major beneficiary of globalization as the world's factory, it increasingly turns to other countries to meet its burgeoning demand for food. That is good news for Brazilian farmers who want to cash in on China's growing demand for soybeans: The environmental organization Greenpeace estimates that more than 2.5 million acres of tropical forest have been cleared in recent years to plant soybeans.

Source

However, some may see
globalization at its core as an easing of borders, making them less important
as countries become dependent on each other to thrive for example the joint
defence between Britain and France (former enemies). Some scholars claim that
governments are becoming less influential in the face of an increasingly
economic world i.e. their position is only judged by how much money they have
so in this sense currency becomes the currency of the world. Others contest
this, insisting that governments are becoming more important because of the
increased need for regulation and order in such a complex world system, saying
it’s unmanageable

To conclude, like I
said globalisation is like fire neither good nor bad, it’s just how it is used
and whether or not like the primitive caveman, this fire will be a turning
point in his life or it will simply consume him. But sadly at the moment this
fire seem to Greek-fire